this post was submitted on 05 Feb 2025
468 points (97.6% liked)

Technology

61774 readers
6199 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] phoenixz 10 points 8 hours ago

Looking at any picture of mark suckerberg makes you believe that they are very much ahead with AI and robotics.

Either way, fuck Facebook, stop trying to ruin everything good in the world.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 10 hours ago

Because he's a massive douche?

[–] SplashJackson 13 points 14 hours ago (2 children)

I don't get it. What would they redefine it to?

[–] [email protected] 4 points 6 hours ago

Did you read the article?

[–] [email protected] 22 points 13 hours ago

Ask "OpenAI"

[–] [email protected] 45 points 19 hours ago

He is definitely in the same list as Trump and Elon Musk.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 15 hours ago (1 children)

What are we going to do with the colonisers?

[–] [email protected] 5 points 6 hours ago

water the tree of liberty? 🥰

[–] [email protected] 54 points 21 hours ago (1 children)

Because he's an insecure and greedy child.

[–] [email protected] 33 points 19 hours ago (1 children)

He's also a sociopath who will say and do anything to get his way.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 13 hours ago

You're right, he's a very complex asshole, indeed!

[–] [email protected] 85 points 1 day ago

I dont give a fuck what you want mark. nobody is. what i want is for you to fuck off.

[–] [email protected] 369 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (5 children)

Money? Is it money?

clicks article

For Meta, it's all about the money.

Shocking.

[–] LillyPip 143 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (4 children)

I taught myself programming in the 80s, then worked myself from waitress and line cook to programmer, UXD, and design lead to the point of being in the running for an Apple design award in the 2010s.

But I cared more than anything about making things FOR people. Making like easier. Making people happy. Making software that was a joy to use.

Then I got sick with something that’s neither curable nor easily manageable.

Now I’m destitute and have to choose between medicine and food, and I’m staring down homelessness. (eta I was homeless from age 16-18, and I won’t do that again now, with autoimmune dysautonomia and in my mid-50s, even if the alternative is final.)

Fuck these idiots who bought their way into nerd status (like Musk) or had one hot idea that took off and didn’t have to do anything after (this fucking guy). Hundreds or thousands of designers and programmers made these companies, and were tossed out like trash so a couple of people can be rock stars, making more per hour than most of us will see in a lifetime.

Slay the dragons.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 10 hours ago

I'm sorry you had to go through this and are suffering. There are people that can (literally) feel your pain, I hope that can give some comfort.

I'm lucky to be in Europe, otherwise I would (very likely) be dead and broke if not.

[–] [email protected] 26 points 1 day ago (2 children)

I mean, didn't he famously steal the idea?

[–] [email protected] 21 points 19 hours ago* (last edited 19 hours ago)

His "idea" was about how to monetize a concept already in existence on MySpace, facilitated by completely ignoring any ethical constraints. That, and a snobbery-based product launch through the Ivies.

[–] LillyPip 12 points 21 hours ago

You’re right. I forgot about the lawsuit and settlement (for $65m). They’re both frauds.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 109 points 1 day ago (2 children)

For Meta, it's all about the money.

And avoiding regulation

[–] [email protected] 53 points 1 day ago (3 children)

Well yeah, because following regulations has an impact on the bottom line.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] [email protected] 146 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Kinda funny how when mega corps can benefit from the millions upon millions of developer hours that they’re not paying for they’re all for open source. But when the mega corps have to ante up (with massive hardware purchases out of reach of any of said developers) they’re suddenly less excited about sharing their work.

[–] [email protected] 38 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I've been begging my company to commit to 1% of our revenue toward open source software we use.

It would be life changing for many of these devs.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 9 hours ago

I'm begging for far less, like 0.001%.

Very much unsuccessful so far.

[–] [email protected] 75 points 1 day ago (2 children)

You are describing parasitic behavior

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 31 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 3 points 16 hours ago
[–] [email protected] 56 points 1 day ago (7 children)

Meta's Llama models also impose licensing restrictions on its users. For example, if you have an extremely successful AI program that uses Llama code, you'll have to pay Meta to use it. That's not open source. Period.

open source != no license restrictions

According to Meta, "Existing open source definitions for software do not encompass the complexities of today's rapidly advancing AI models. We are committed to keep working with the industry on new definitions to serve everyone safely and responsibly within the AI community."

i think, he's got a point, tho

is ai open source, when the trainig data isn't?
as i understand, right now: yes, it's enough, that the code is open source. and i think that's a big problem

i'm not deep into ai, so correct me if i'm wrong.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 15 hours ago* (last edited 15 hours ago) (2 children)

Software licenses that "discriminate against any person or group of persons" or "restrict anyone from making use of the program in a specific field of endeavor" are not open source. Llama's license doesn't just restrict Llama from being used by companies with "700 million monthly active users", it also restricts Llama from being used to "create, train, fine tune, or otherwise improve an AI model" or being used for military purposes (although Meta made an exception for the US military). Therefore, Llama is not open source.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 10 points 18 hours ago

Open source software doesn't, by definition, place restrictions on usage.

The license must not restrict anyone from making use of the program in a specific field of endeavor.

Clauses like "you can use this software freely except in specific circumstances" fly against that. Open source licenses usually have very little to say about what the software should be used for, and usually just as an affirmation that you can use the software for whatever you want.

load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›